A motor learning perspective for optimizing intervention intensity

International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology

Volumn 14, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 447-450

  Manes, Jordan ^a   Robin, Donald A ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER AT SAN ANTONIO   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT SAN ANTONIO   (United States)

Author keywords

Intervention; Motor learning; Speech language pathology

Indexed keywords

HUMAN; LANGUAGE DISABILITY; METHODOLOGY; NOTE; SPEECH DISORDER; SPEECH THERAPY;

HUMANS; LANGUAGE DISORDERS; LANGUAGE THERAPY; SPEECH DISORDERS; SPEECH THERAPY; SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY;

EID: 84866400145     PISSN: 17549515     EISSN: 17549507     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/17549507.2012.687399     Document Type: Review

References (33)

1. Adams, S. G., & Page, A. D. (2000). Effects of selected practice and feedback variables on speech motor learning. Journal of Medical Speech-Language Pathology, 8, 215-220.
2. Austermann Hula, S. N., Robin, D. A., Maas, E., Ballard, K. J., & Schmidt, R. A. (2008). Effects of feedback frequency and timing on acquisition, retention, and transfer of speech skills in acquired apraxia of speech. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 51, 1088-1113.
3. Ballard, K. J., Maas, E., & Robin, D. A. (2007). Treating control of voicing in apraxia of speech with variable practice. Aphasi-ology, 21, 1195-1217.
4. Baker, E. (2012). Optimal intervention intensity. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 14, 401-409.
5. Barratt, J., Littlejohns, P., & Thompson, J. (1992). Trial of intensive compared with weekly speech therapy in preschool children. Archives of Disease in Children, 67, 106-108.
6. Edeal, D. M., & Gildersleeve-Neumann, C. E. (2011). The importance of production frequency in therapy for childhood apraxia of speech. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 20, 95-110.
7. Fischman, M. G., & Lim, C. H. (1991). Infl uence of extended practice on programming time, movement time, and transfer in simple target-striking responses. Journal of Motor Behavior, 23, 39-50.
8. Fujiki, M., Brinton, B., & Todd, C. M. (1996). Social skills of children with specifi c language impairment. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 27, 195-202.
9. Gierut, J. A. (1998). Natural domains of cyclicity in phonological acquisition. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, 12, 481-499.
10. Gierut, J. A. (2001). Complexity in phonological treatment: Clinical factors. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 32, 229-241.
11. Gierut, J. A. (2007). Phonological complexity and language learn-ability. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 16, 6-17.
12. Keetch, K. M., & Lee, T. D. (2007). The effect of self-regulated and experimenter-imposed practice schedules on motor learning for tasks of varying diffi culty. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 78, 476-486.
13. Kiran, S. (2007). Complexity in the treatment of naming defi cits. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 16, 18-29.
14. Knock, T. R., Ballard, K. J., Robin, D. A., & Schmidt, R. A. (2000). Infl uence of order of stimulus presentation on speech motor learning: A principled approach to treatment for apraxia of speech. Aphasiology, 14, 653-668.
15. Mass, E., Barlow, J., Robin, D., & Shapiro, L. (2002). Treatment of sound errors in aphasia and apraxia of speech: Effects of phonological complexity. Aphasiology, 16, 609-622.
16. Park, J. H., & Shea, C. H. (2003). Effect of practice on effector independence. Journal of Motor Behavior, 35, 33-40.
17. Park, J. H., & Shea, C. H. (2005). Sequence learning: Response structure and effector transfer. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A-Human Experimental Psychology, 58, 387-419.
18. Prizant, B. M., Audet, L. R., Burke, G. M., Hummel, L. J., Maher, S. R., & Theadore, G. (1990). Communication disorders and emotional/behavioral disorders in children and adolescents. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 55, 179-192.
19. Proctor-Williams, K., & Fey, M. E. (2007). Recast density and acquisition of novel irregular past tense verbs. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 50, 1029-1047.
20. Ruben, R. J. (2000). Redefi ning the survival of the fi ttest: Communication disorders in the 21st century. Laryngoscope, 110, 241-245.
21. Rvachew, S., & Nowak, M. (2001). The effect of target-selection strategy on phonological learning. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 44, 610-623.
22. Schmidt, R. A., & Bjork, R. A. (1992). New conceptualizations of practice: Common principles in 3 paradigms suggest new concepts for training. Psychological Science, 3, 207-217.
23. Schmidt, R. A., & Lee, T. D. (2005). Motor control and learning: A behavioral emphasis (4th ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
24. Schmidt, R. A., & Young, D. E. (1991). Methodology for motor learning: A paradigm for kinematic feedback. Journal of Motor Behavior, 23, 13-24.
25. Shea, C. H., & Kohl, R. M. (1991). Composition of practice: Infl uence on the retention of motor skills. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 62, 187-195.
26. Shea, J. B., & Morgan, R. L. (1979). Contextual Interference Effects on the Acquisition, Retention, and Transfer of a Motor Skill. Journal of Experimental Psychology-Human Learning and Memory, 5, 179-187.
27. Thompson, C. K., & Shapiro, L. P. (2007). Complexity in treatment of syntactic defi cits. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 16, 30-42.
28. Thompson, C. K., Ballard, K. J., & Shapiro, L. P. (1998). The role of syntactic complexity in training wh-movement structures in agrammatic aphasia: Optimal order for promoting generalization. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 4, 661-674.
29. Warren, S. F., Fey, M. E., & Yoder, P. J. (2007). Differential treatment intensity research: A missing link to creating optimally effective communication interventions. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews, 13, 70-77.
30. Winstein, C. J., & Schmidt, R. A. (1990). Reduced frequency of knowledge of results enhances motor skill learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition, 16, 677-691.
31. Wulf, G., Shae, C., & Matschiner, S. (1998). Frequent feedback enhances complex motor skill learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 30, 180-92.
32. Wulf, G., & Shea, C. H. (2002). Principles derived from the study of simple skills do not generalize to complex skill learning. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 9, 185-211.
33. Wulf, G., Schmidt, R. A., & Deubel, H. (1993). Reduced feedback frequency enhances generalized motor program learning but not parameterization learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition, 19, 1134-1150.